Erwin

I was always intrigued that Patton "personally selected the Sherman" for Europe. So, what were the other choices?

I hope we eventually are able to acquire from adjacent units without having to embark/disembark. Yes, there should be a time penalty. But, it would reduce the need for so many orders and a queue when several teams are trying to board the same vehicle for ammo resupply. Also, it feels like units can carry way more extra heavy ammo and AT weapons with too little fatigue penalty. Maybe I don't run em as much or as far in one WEGO turn as other players, but even with max load-outs I rarely see any fatigue during movement.

Ah... ok I will save them in a "UNUSED MODS" folder I have just in case... They all look so good it is a shame to permanently delete anything of yours if they can be renumbered and used. (Perhaps make it clear which mods are completely unusable vs which can be renumbered.)

Beautiful... Just to confirm that is 3 old PzIV folders G, H and J? And the variants in those are also of no more use? Thanks...

My question is "What is gained by having a MG crewmember spot a target when it's almost always impossible to move the MG a couple of inches so it can shoot at the target? How does this make the game more enjoyable, playable, or even realistic?" The current LOS/LOF system does not result in many desirable game outcomes, but does guarantee many undesirable outcomes.

I think many of us experience a significant frustration over the LOS/LOF issues. It is extremely common that a MG behind a hedge has LOS to an enemy unit but cannot fire at it. And there seems to be no way to move it a couple of inches so that it can. In these instances it's unclear what is the point in game terms of having the 3rd ammo bearer being able to see an enemy unit, but having no way of moving a gun to shoot at it, when in RL it would be easy.

Hasn't it been established for some time, that barns etc provide much less protection? It would be helpful if there was an indication (like we had in CM1) as to which buildings were "heavy" or "light" at least.

Ah, ok... thanks... Your signs look really good... too perfect and new perhaps? maybe need some weathering and damage?

Looks great. So, this will replace the signs folder you posted on CMMODS a couple days ago? Can we delete that d/l?

What a shame... but thank you...

Aris: You say "delete all the old PzIV mods", but I noticed the old ones have variants for 15PzGren and HG divisions. Do those variants no longer work?

IIRC these options automatically are selected depending on weather.

Ok thanks... That was it. I enjoyed the campaign. But, the final battle was way too easy for the Axis defenders with the US making silly suicidal attacks. I still have to fight the final defensive battle in KG Engel. It will be interesting if the AI attack is also weak in that as well.

Was completing battle #6 when my system crashed. It was an easy defensive battle (the whole German regiment defends a town vs US attack), so I don't want to have to replay it if battle 6 is the final battle in the campaign. Anyone know if #6 is the final battle? Thanks...

I have always wondered if what the Israelis did was a good idea... the Merkava tank that can carry a team that can exit out the rear.

Yes, good idea...

That's beautiful. Need to tone down the speedometer and other gauges etc though. Kinda bright.

Very interesting read. Thanks...

"1-A realistic limit to the ammunition an unit can acquire from vehicles, based on weight a number of soldiers are able to carry. A heavy emcumbered unit can´t move fast and carry like a mule at the same time. 2-Possibility to stock ammnunition in any place outside vehicles. So, units can acquire or drop ammnunition in any place. Also an option to stock ammnunition in any place (ie buildings) in the scenario editor." +1 and for all CM2 titles.

I know it's a ginormous amount of work, but a campaign that simulated the Ardennes offensive (Axis vs AI) in miniature (ie company-battalion level) through some of the critical engagements would be awesome.

Yes, that breakdown was helpful. So there should be 5+3 subfolders in the SS folder, and 5+2 subfolders in the HEER folder, yes? Thanks.

The CM2 LOS system would be fine if the system would automatically have the unit shift position so that it can fire at what one of the team members sees. The situation with MG's and guns is even more annoying than the above tank example as it's often the 3rd ammo bearer who can see the target, but the gun can't be moved the couple of inches so it can fire at the target, no matter what movement jiggery pokery one attempts. Because of that, the current system is not realistic, merely frustrating. Since the CM games are no way intended as first person shooters, it is inappropriate to have this sort of first person shooter challenge. A simpler LOS tool where if "the unit" can see the target, then "the unit prime weapon" can shoot at it would be so appreciated and make the game much more playable.

Yes thanks. Looking forward to it. I only wish we could use it in CMA. (Am assuming we cannot?) Now we need more Afghan scenarios and campaigns of course...

I love the way propagandists (everywhere) can use the same info to claim completely the opposite of what is actually being said or shown. Whatever it is, if you say it long enuff and enuff times, people will start to believe it.

It would be helpful to know which sub-mods can work together and which won't. I am assuming that all the Allied files will work all together and there is no need to select anything. Re the Germans, my understanding is that we need to separate out the SS folders from the Heer folders. However, are there any mod sub-folders that should be used in both the Heer folder AND the SS folder??